The Turf Club did not give the trainer Mr Jim Bolger reasons for the imposition on him of a £1,000 fine over the running of a horse at Naas, the High Court was told yesterday.
After the race in July 1994, it was implied that the horse, trained by Mr Bolger, did not run "on its merits", said Mr Eoghan Fitzsimons SC, for Mr Bolger.
Mr Fitzsimons said it was an implied term of his client's contract that he had a right to be informed in advance of the precise facts constituting the basis for the charge against him. It seemed the Turf Club did not give him the reasons despite many requests.
Counsel for the Turf Club argued that Mr Bolger had accepted that it was appropriate to have an inquiry. The trainer could not now say he did not know what the charge was.
Mr Bolger has taken proceedings against four Turf Club stewards, Mr Michael Osborne, Mr Frank Hardy, Mr Seamus McGrath and Mr Michael Dargan. The case began on March 4th, adjourned until yesterday.
When it opened, Mr Fitzsimons said that on July 20th, 1994, 10 horses went to post in the Jasmine Maiden race. Mr Bolger was the trainer of two, the favourite, Pozzoli, and Tirolean, which started at 12 to one.
Pozzoli won by a head from Tirolean. After the race the local stewards held an inquiry into the running of Tirolean. The charge laid against the jockey, Mr Seamus Heffernan, Mr Bolger and the horse was that the horse "did not run on its merits".
Mr Heffernan was suspended for 28 days, Mr Bolger fined £1,000 and the horse banned for 30 days. No reason was given for the decision. The implication was that Mr Bolger had been responsible for the horse not running on its merits, said counsel.
Mr Bolger appealed, and a Turf Club hearing took place in August 1994. Four stewards made up the governing body. Mr Bolger's appeal failed, again without any reason being given.
Yesterday Mr Kevin Feeney SC, for the stewards, said the claim was based on contract and on racing rules. A trainer was responsible for a horse which was run in a race and the manner in which the animal was run. There was an obligation under the rules that every horse be run on its merits.
Mr Feeney said from a transcript of the Turf Club hearing Mr Bolger accepted that it was appropriate to have an inquiry. He could not now say he did not know what the charge was. He had chosen to put evidence at the inquiry, and his real complaint was that it had not been accepted.
Mr Feeney said it was clear there had been a determination that there was a breach of the rules, but that did not require any misconduct.
Ms Nuala MacKenzie, solicitor, said she had acted for Mr Bolger at the Turf Club hearing in August 1994, and had instructed senior counsel. Legal expenses connected with the hearing had totalled £10,081, including VAT.
Ms Justice Macken was told that Mr Bolger would not be giving evidence.
The hearing continues today.